Bo7b:
>Re meta & Burger's pedophilia, I know nada; only what I've read here & brief
>conversations with Bruno last year.
What did Bruno breifly have to say?
>But, Kirt, seems like you're condemning
>him as a scientist, researcher, teacher, guru, human, etc.
Yeah, it is very hard to respect him period at this point. If he can be so
far off base in his actions and ideations, why should one trust his
pronouncements on his infection which bloomed eating raw dairy, his
rationalization of his wife's death, his stance that cooked foods have no
taste change, his testing of ORKOS foods to declare their "originality",
even his love of fresh peas. It certainly isn't clear to me that Guy-Claude
qualifies as a scientist, researcher, or guru. He relies largely on
anecdotal evidence, has published no research that I know of, and as a
"human" has a pretty lousy track record at getting along with his wife, not
to mention the rest of the "cooked world". I plan to re-read his book in
the coming months with my crap detector turned on full blast (as opposed to
what I now consider over-enthusiasm the first time around). Instincto is a
grand grand tale, but I'm afraid it has become inbred in its inability to
deal with non-examples of its theory or to provide a practical scheme for
human alimentation.
You're still on a high from your conversion to instincto, Bo7b, and
relative to your former raw vegan diet this is very understandable. Imagine
my high in switching from SAD to instincto with a few months of Fit for
Life in-between. But time goes on, and instincto looks quite overblown in
hind-sight--probably closer to the mark than anything NH offers, but not
exactly Perfection.
How about we take two prison populations and let one go at an instincto
feast of raw foods over a couple years, and the other have smallish meals
of RAF and, say, steamed veggies or salads over the same time? Or Schmid's
seafood and veggie diet? Or Aajonous' blender RAF and prescriptions? I
would be hardpressed to bet on the outcome of such a trial. Instincto is
not the end of alimentary schemes, nor the end of medicine (and certainly
not the end of dentistry ;)). It is not man's true diet and Burger is not a
genious--indeed it would be very possible to make a great case that he was
more of a plagarist who needs the spotlight more than anything else.
>(eg, "Do we really need anyone to tell us what our nature is?"). Well, yeah, SOME of us
>do.
Yeah, maybe this is so. Our social nature possibly demands that we have
_some_sort_ of heirarchy and leader/follower situation. Maybe for me when I
gave up on my parents, I gave up hero worship of all sorts; I don't know.
There is part of me that is simply pissed at Guy-Claude for failing the
instincto cause. And it even triggers a bit of my own repressed pain.
Nevertheless, instincto can hardly mature when its main guru is so off
base. It would be better off if he were out of the ballpark altogether.
It's kinda like Shelton: the untruth mixed in with the truth of his writing
gets carried on for the ride. Without reseach clueing us on the veracity of
the various raw theories, we simply have anecdotal experience (usually very
vicarious and usually contradictory) and IMPORTANTLY our own experience.
What I mean by, "Do we really need anyone to tell us what our nature is?"
is "How can anyone tell you _your_ particular human nature?" It's like your
question in M2M about whether to have cassia before bed or upon waking.
Really, what possible difference could it make what someone else
experiences? All one has to do is try it for oneself, no? It's interesting
to talk about but someone else's experience is, in the end, someone else's
experience. You even mentioned that you would eat Coleman meats if I gave
them my approval. It is _your_ approval that matters, and you will only
find it (or not) by trying it for yourself--which is also true about raw
dairy, steamed veggies, insects, ceviche, etc etc.
One of the most exciting parts of instincto to me is that different people
will select different foods at different times. I'm continually amazed that
Melisa will be on about a particular food that is sawdust to me, or vice
versa. But to turn around and play guru (or follower) seems like a
contradiction of this "the answer lies in yourself" policy--especially when
it extends to non-eating matters like pedophilia.
>I lived over half a century on this planet (without an owner's manual
>for my body) & it took Frederick Mann to introduce me to Instinctive
>Nutrition (& Burger to intro HIM) & Deborah to intro me to Shaeffer (sp?) &
>Zephyr (& Burger to intro THEM to IN). I still feel that IN is the most
>significant -- & most fun -- health discovery I've made since stumbling upon
>the rest of Natural Hygiene ('tho mebbe Biomagnetics will prove even more
>valuable & fun?) & for that I'm greatly indebted to GC, be he deviant,
>pedophile, murderer, etc. I don't believe the planet wudda been better off
>without GC.
(Aside: IMO you overrate them all (as well as Bob A, Ward N, and others you
consider "giants"). I'm not even comfortable with you looking up to me at
times regarding food stuff. We're all just people like yourself (hopefully
you're not similar to Burger though ;)) and your milage may vary, as the
internet acronym goes. I respect the above folks (well, not Burger), and
you, each in distinctive ways. But deifying them, even a little, might
cause trouble in the truth-seeking department, as well as the freedom
department--which might get your attention better ;) I realize that you are
probably showing respect in your own way, but it does seem to be a theme
with you (and me and everybody) that you are always looking for someone to
look up to. Maybe I'm out of line, but that's the way it has seemed to me
at times.)
The "discovery of RAF" was made independently by
Howell/Price/Stefanson/others and Schmid/Aajonus/others standing on their
shoulders. It was only a matter of time before someone took it to the
extreme. Too bad that someone was Guy-Claude is how history may look at it.
When I weigh his positive and negative contribution the balance doesn't
clearly show a surplus. And the discovery of the taste-change and ability
to select food by pleasure in the absence of denatured food was written
about long long ago by Adelle Davis. It is even likely that basing a diet
solely on the taste-change is one of the biggest blunders of instincto.
What else is there exclusive to instincto or Burger?
I guess I ramble on this stuff because I'd like to see a future for
instincto apart from a cult or even the loosely brambled practice that
charcterizes today's fruitarians. Somewhere down the road it would be nice
if instincto rubbed elbows with the other emerging paleo-diets and evolved
into something greater than the sum of its parts, but with Montrame's track
record screwing its fledgling reputation up but good, I wonder how long in
the future it might be. But it may well be that people coming from, say, a
low carb or grainless diet might be the more balanced instinctos of the
future than the we see at present. ???
Cheers,
Kirt
|
